On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 15:53 +0200, Erwin Rol wrote:
On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 15:42 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-06-25 at 11:08 +0200, Erwin Rol wrote:
> > of course when using
> > the binaries there is no circular dependency :-)
> Exactly. It also has another advantage: Nothing can be "more original"
> than the "original" - I.e. why rebuilding target libs when you can use
> the original files?
Because those "target libs" are open source (wrapper) libs and have to
be build by someone, this is very different from a closed source UNIX
you mentioned where you don't have any other option but to use the
closed source libraries.
To me, rebuilding something just because it can be done,
is
overengineering, because
1. There is no guarantee these cross built files will identical to the
"original" files.
2. You are building cross, to run these files on a target system, i.e.
these files must be provided by somebody for the "target system".
3. Target files from a Linux perspective are just "meaningless binary
data files", just like any other binary files (jpegs, sound files).
And the "original" in this case would be
Microsoft libraries, and not some hacked up mingw-runtime and
w32api ;-)
Well, mingw does not have any build-time dependency on M$-libs. It
only
has implicit run-time deps on M$-libs.
Ralf